Written Answers

Tuesday 19 September 2000

Scottish Executive

Air Services

Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to promote air freight at Wick Airport.

Sarah Boyack: This is a matter for Highlands and Islands Airports Ltd who, in partnership with relevant public and private sector organisations, are continually engaged in the process of promoting and bringing more business to Wick Airport.

Caisteal Tioram

Mr Murray Tosh (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-5359 by Mr Sam Galbraith on 29 March 2000, whether an application for a scheduled monument consent has now been received in respect of Caisteal Tioram and whether any agreement has been reached between Historic Scotland and the owners of the building over how the building’s future might be secured.

Rhona Brankin: I have asked Graeme Munro, Chief Executive of Historic Scotland to respond. His response is as follows:

  An application for scheduled monument consent in respect of emergency stabilisation works to the north-west curtain wall of Caisteal Tioram was received on 27 April. Consent was granted on 19 May, subject to conditions, and it is understood that the works have now been carried out.

  An earlier application for scheduled monument consent for the conservation of Caisteal Tioram, which includes the consolidation of the curtain wall and the consolidation and re-roofing of the standing buildings, was received on 23 February 1999. On 30 April 1999 the applicants were informed that the Secretary of State (now Scottish Ministers) was minded to refuse consent for this restoration. The applicants have exercised their right to ask for a hearing, which will take the form of a public local inquiry. The Scottish Executive Inquiry Reporters Unit is now making arrangements for the inquiry.

Cancer

Dorothy-Grace Elder (Glasgow) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive how many breast reconstruction nurses are employed by each health board and whether these positions are full or part time.

Susan Deacon: This information is not held centrally in the detail required.

Cancer

Dorothy-Grace Elder (Glasgow) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive how many women attended mammogram screening in (a) 1995-96, (b) 1996-97, (c) 1997-98 and (d) 1998-99 and what percentage this was of eligible women.

Susan Deacon: The number of women aged 50-64 years who were invited for breast screening and the number and percentage of those who attended in years 1995-96 to 1998-99 is given in the table below.

  


Year of Invitation


Number of Women1 
Invited for Screening


Number of Women1 
Screened


% Attendance




1995-96


129,678


93,442


72




1996-97


138,614


99,720


72




1997-98


145,355


103,674


71




1998-99


138,045


101,569


74




  Notes:

  1. The above figures relate to routine appointments only.

  Routine screening appointments cover women who have been invited, by the screening programme, to attend a standard appointment. This usually occurs once every three years.

Cancer

Dorothy-Grace Elder (Glasgow) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive when full implementation of extended mammogram screening to age 70 will commence.

Dorothy-Grace Elder (Glasgow) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether there is a need to procure more mobile breast screening units to address the requirements of mammogram screening being extended to women up to 70 years of age.

Susan Deacon: I have commissioned a task group to look at the detail of extending the upper age of routine invitation for breast screening and to prepare an implementation plan. I expect the group’s plan to include advice on a number of issues including timescale and mobile and static screening unit requirements. I look forward to receiving the group’s plan by spring 2001.

  As part of the additional £26 million health promotion fund which I announced on 20 August the breast screening service will receive £160,000 this year for film viewing and x-ray equipment which will be required to assist with the future development of the programme.

Cancer

Dorothy-Grace Elder (Glasgow) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the standard set by the Clinical Standards Board for Scotland for the number of breast care nurses of one whole-time equivalent nurse per 150 breast cancers per year is being met.

Susan Deacon: The information is not available centrally in the format requested.

  Cancer is one of three clinical priorities for the NHS in Scotland.

  The Clinical Standards Board for Scotland (CSBS) have developed core principles for all cancer services and tumour specific standards for breast (and colorectal, lung and gynaecological) cancer.

  Pilot assessment of these standards (including breast cancer) has been completed, with formal reviews due to commence later this year. The CSBS will publish reports on their assessments. Once these are available it will be possible to assess services provided nationwide against the standards.

Cancer

Dorothy-Grace Elder (Glasgow) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what measures are being introduced to meet the Scottish Intercollegiate Network guidelines in respect of breast cancer care.

Susan Deacon: Cancer is one of three clinical priorities for the NHS in Scotland.

  The Scottish Cancer Group leads and directs Scotland’s cancer strategy. A broad range of initiatives is being pursued with the aim of providing the best quality care possible for everyone with cancer. For example;

  Cancer Managed Clinical Networks, peer reviewing patient outcomes and sharing good practice, to ensure access to best care possible regardless of where patients live.

  Underpinning these networks are systems of prospective clinical audit, ensuring clinicians have access to the information they require to continuously assess and improve the care provided.

  The Clinical Standards Board for Scotland has developed generic and tumour specific standards for all cancer services. Pilot assessments have recently been carried out, and full assessments will commence later this year. These standards are evidence based, founded as they are on the SIGN Guideline for Breast Cancer.

Cancer

Dorothy-Grace Elder (Glasgow) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive how much funding was allocated to specific breast cancer projects from August 1999 to July 2000.

Susan Deacon: The Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Executive Health Department allocated £457,861 to four new projects related to breast cancer in the period August 1999 to July 2000.

Cancer

Dorothy-Grace Elder (Glasgow) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what is being done to encourage women from deprived areas to come forward for mammogram screening.

Susan Deacon: A range of initiatives are undertaken by health boards to encourage women from deprived areas to come forward for breast screening, such as more mobile screening in inner city deprived areas and media campaigns.

  Attendance for breast screening has increased from 71% in 1997-98 to 74% in 1998-99.

Children

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how often Ministers have met representatives of the Scottish Childcare Board since 1 June 1999, on what dates these meetings took place and what issues were discussed.

Mr Sam Galbraith: In November 1999 I announced the merger of the Scottish Childcare Board (SCB) and the Early Years Education Forum. The new Scottish Early Education and Childcare Forum provides an integrated source of advice on these important and inter-related services.

  Since 1 June 1999 I have met SCB once – on 4 October 1999 – and my officials met members twice. I also chaired the first meeting of the new forum on 24 July 2000. The relevant information is provided below.

  


Meeting Date


Issues discussed




24 June 1999


Presentation on Working Families 
Tax Credit and Disabled Persons Tax Credit
Initial feedback from Childcare Plans 

Preliminary advice to the New Opportunities 
Fund on its out of school care programme




5 July 1999


Advice to the New Opportunities Fund




4 October 1999


Quality Initiatives, Training and 
Qualifications
Future Proposals for Scottish Childcare 
Board and Early Years Forum
Childcare Information Services
Annual Report of the Scottish Childcare 
Board
Advice to the New Opportunities Fund




24 July 2000


Background & Remit of new forum
Childcare Strategy: Progress and 
Challenges 
Future Business: Options and Priorities

Children

Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what impact the European Convention on Human Rights will have on the Children’s Hearing System.

Peter Peacock: Under the Children (Scotland) Act 1995, the child’s interests are paramount. A case currently before the Inner House of the Court of Session challenges various aspects of the Children’s Hearing System and will help determine the system’s compatibility with the Convention.

Children

Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it is taking to ensure that those involved in the Children’s Hearing System are fully aware of any implications which the European Convention on Human Rights will have for the system.

Peter Peacock: The Scottish Executive issued a guidance leaflet in July to all panel members and other interested parties. Children’s Panel Training Organisers have run a number of training courses and more are planned. Practice Guidance established by Children’s Panel Chairmen and the Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration is being reviewed and will be sent to all panel members before 2 October. The Scottish Executive Circular on Children’s Hearings which advises on, among other things, procedural matters in respect of the recruitment of panel members has been also been reviewed and will be issued shortly.

Children

Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers the role of the Children’s Reporter to be compliant with the European Convention on Human Rights.

Peter Peacock: The role of the reporter is one aspect of the Children’s Hearings system being challenged in the case at present before the Inner House of the Court of Session. The Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration has already reviewed practice and issued Guidance for Reporters.

Children

Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers that children are entitled under the European Convention on Human Rights to legal support for appearances before Children’s Panels and, if so, what implications this will have for the legal aid system.

Peter Peacock: Children and their relevant persons involved in the hearings system may be entitled to advice and assistance under legal aid. The Children’s Hearing itself is a non-adversarial forum to discuss what is best for the child. The precise status of a hearing and whether there is an entitlement under the terms of the European Convention on Human Rights to legal aid for representation is one aspect of the case currently before the Court of Session. The Scottish Executive is challenging the case and will await the judgment before reviewing arrangements for legal aid.

Children

Mr Kenneth Gibson (Glasgow) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it is taking to promote an ethos in schools which facilitates recognition of mental health problems in young people.

Mr Sam Galbraith: The Scottish Executive believes that all schools should be Health Promoting Schools which instil a sense of social responsibility, respect and care for self, tolerance and understanding and respect and care for others. The Executive also supports the Scottish School Ethos Network.

  The new Health Education 5-14 guidelines for schools, which will be published soon, cover three interconnected themes. One of these, emotional health, explores emotions, feelings and mental health and how these affect us and our relationships.

Council Tax

Mr Kenneth Gibson (Glasgow) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what progress it is making in introducing a more strategic approach to council tax debt recovery which would avoid multiple, simultaneous actions against debtors for several years of debt and provide more flexible and reliable payment options.

Mr Jack McConnell: I would refer you to the joint CoSLA/Scottish Executive Report It Pays to Pay and to my answer to question S1W-4296 to Des McNulty of 23 February.

Council Tax

Mr Kenneth Gibson (Glasgow) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it is taking, in partnership with local government, to ensure that there is negotiation of council tax debts prior to implementation of formal debt recovery procedures.

Mr Jack McConnell: I would refer you to the joint CoSLA/Scottish Executive Report It Pays to Pay and to my answer to question S1W-4296 to Des McNulty of 23 February. I would encourage anyone having difficulty with their council tax payments to discuss with their council what flexibilities are available.

Council Tax

Mr Kenneth Gibson (Glasgow) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what steps are being taken to ensure that clients are not pursued by different sheriff officers for council tax arrears from different years owed to the same council.

Mr Jack McConnell: I would refer you to the joint CoSLA/Scottish Executive Report It Pays to Pay and to my answer to question S1W-4296 to Des McNulty of 23 February. Individuals who are being pursued by different sheriff officers can arrange payment terms on the consolidated debt.

Culture

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how often Ministers have met representatives of the National Galleries of Scotland since 1 June 1999, on what dates these meetings took place and what issues were discussed.

Rhona Brankin: Ministers have met twice with representatives of the National Galleries of Scotland, on 2 August 1999 and 18 July 2000, to discuss development plans for the future and funding provided by the Executive.

Culture

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how often Ministers have met representatives of the National Library of Scotland since 1 June 1999, on what dates these meetings took place and what issues were discussed.

Rhona Brankin: Ministers met representatives of the National Library of Scotland on two occasions, on 3 June 1999 and 22 June 2000, to discuss development plans for the future and funding provided by the Executive.

Culture

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how often Ministers have met representatives of the National Museums of Scotland since 1 June 1999, on what dates these meetings took place and what issues were discussed.

Rhona Brankin: Ministers have met twice with representatives of the National Museums of Scotland, on 21 September 1999 and 12 June 2000, to discuss development plans for the future and funding provided by the Executive.

Culture

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how often Ministers have met representatives of Scottish Screen since 1 June 1999, on what dates these meetings took place and what issues were discussed.

Rhona Brankin: Since 1 June 1999, five meetings have taken place between Ministers and representatives of Scottish Screen: 5 July and 7 December 1999, 11 April, 16 May and 23 May 2000. Matters discussed included Scottish Screen’s corporate plan, the proposal for a Scottish film studio, and other measures to promote film production in Scotland.

Education

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how often Ministers have met representatives of the Scottish Further Education Funding Council since 1 June 1999, on what dates these meetings took place and what issues were discussed.

Henry McLeish: There has been one formal meeting between Ministers and representatives of the Scottish Further Education Funding Council. The Chief Executive and the Chairman of the Council met with the Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning and the Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning on 7 June 2000. The meeting was convened to discuss progress on the Council’s corporate plan.

Education

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how often Ministers have met representatives of the Scottish Higher Education Funding Council since 1 June 1999, on what dates these meetings took place and what issues were discussed.

Henry McLeish: Since 1 June 1999, there has been one formal meeting between the Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning and representatives of the Scottish Higher Education Funding Council. This was on 6 March 2000 when a wide range of topics was discussed.

Education

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how often Ministers have met representatives of the Scottish Consultative Council on the Curriculum since 1 June 1999, on what dates these meetings took place and what issues were discussed.

Mr Sam Galbraith: Ministers have met with representatives of the former Scottish Consultative Council on the Curriculum (SCCC) on two occasions.

  On 9 December 1999, Peter Peacock, Deputy Minister for Children and Education had a joint meeting with the Council of SCCC and the Board of the former Scottish Council for Educational Technology (SCET) where he was briefed on the impending merger of the two organisations and their future workplace.

  On 6 June 2000, Rhona Brankin, Deputy Minister for Sport and Culture met with representatives of SCCC to discuss cultural issues within the curriculum.

Education

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how often Ministers have met representatives of the Scottish Further Education Unit since 1 June 1999, on what dates these meetings took place and what issues were discussed.

Henry McLeish: There have been no formal meetings between Ministers and representatives of the Scottish Further Education Unit since 1 June 1999.

Education

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how often Ministers have met representatives of the Scottish Council for Educational Technology since 1 June 1999, on what dates these meetings took place and what issues were discussed.

Mr Sam Galbraith: Peter Peacock, Deputy Minister for Children and Education has met representatives of the former body of the Scottish Council for Educational Technology (SCET) on two occasions.

  On 9 December 1999 the Minister had a joint meeting with the Board of SCET and the former council of the Scottish Consultative Council on the Curriculum (SCCC) where he was briefed on the impending merger of the two organisations and their future workplace.

  On 24 January 2000, the Minister toured the offices of SCET in Glasgow.

  Mr Peacock has also received technical presentations on a range of education information and communication technology applications by staff of SCET.

Education

Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether the core staffing formula for secondary schools of 10.24 + (0.0596 x Pupil Roll) still applies and, if so, when this formula was introduced and how pupil/teacher ratios can improve while the formula continues to apply.

Mr Sam Galbraith: The core staffing formula for secondary schools was issued for consultation in June 1988, but has never been ratified on a formal basis. Some education authorities have applied the formula without alteration, whereas others have used the guidance provided to formulate staffing standards which they believe are more flexible and better able to meet local requirements.

Enterprise

Mr David Davidson (North-East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what representations it has made to Her Majesty’s Government regarding any disproportionate burden placed on small Scottish businesses by the movement of welfare support administration from the Department of Social Security to payroll departments.

Henry McLeish: Concern about the burden of welfare support administration upon business payroll departments has been highlighted in a series of meetings held with business across Scotland and I will ensure that the concerns of Scottish business on this issue are communicated the UK Government.

Enterprise

Mr David Davidson (North-East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has any plans to exempt small business from any current or future legislation.

Henry McLeish: The exemption of small businesses from regulation has been raised with me at meetings with business across Scotland and I am considering this with other matters raised.

Enterprise

Mr David Davidson (North-East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will undertake research to evaluate any costs to business of litigation generally and to examine any specific areas in which litigation is occurring and trends in litigation affecting business.

Mr David Davidson (North-East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will support the setting up of a national legal advice hotline for Scottish business.

Henry McLeish: The cost to business of litigation and possible need for a national legal advice hotline for Scottish business have not been raised with me in consultations I have held recently with business across Scotland, but if the member wishes to provide me with information on these matters I will give it consideration.

Enterprise

Mr David Davidson (North-East Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive (a) how many new business regulations it has introduced and (b) how many regulations it has removed in the year from 1 July 1999 and what the cost has been to business of these changes.

Henry McLeish: Ten regulations, with Regulatory Impact Assessments covering the impact on business, have been introduced since 1 July 1999. No RIA’s have been prepared with respect to the removal of regulations. A meaningful assessment of the cost to business is not available since in many instances information about specific cost implications has not proven possible to obtain. I have in mind to introduce measures to overcome this difficulty.

Finance

Mr Duncan McNeil (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has any plans to use the Scottish variable rate of income tax as part of the forthcoming draft budget.

Mr Jack McConnell: As promised in the Partnership Agreement and the Programme for Government , the Scottish Executive has confirmed, again, that it has no such plans.

Finance

Mr Duncan McNeil (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what responses it received to its consultation on the Annual Expenditure Report Investing in You .

Mr Jack McConnell: The attached note provides a summary of the responses to the consultation on Investing in You .

  SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION RESPONSES ON INVESTING IN YOU

  When the Annual Expenditure Report, Investing in You, was published in April 2000, the Scottish Executive invited members of the public to respond with their views on the proposed budget for 2001-02. The result of that consultation is set out below. The Minister for Finance also visited four areas of Scotland to meet with an invited audience and hear their views on the proposed budget. The questions asked and the broad themes that emerged are also set out.

  Written submissions

  172 letters, postcards or e-mails were received during the consultation period. Of these, 134 (79%) were from members of the public. (Of these, 23 identified themselves as farmers, five as students, one as a general practitioner, one as a vet and one as an academic.) Seventeen responses were received from charities, societies and pressure groups, nine from public bodies, four from professional bodies, three from trade unions and two each from community councils and trade or representative bodies. Two responses were also received from members of the Scottish Parliament, one of which covered a petition from constituents.

  A small number of responses (mostly from organisations) made comments on the layout and presentation of the consultation document. The vast majority, however, made comments about areas where additional expenditure should be devoted. Many of these were from a particular perspective and there appear to be four distinct campaigns for additional spending. There was no support for reduced spending.

  In addition to a submission from Shelter (Scotland), we also received 26 postcards distributed by that organisation. In addition to the petition on behalf of improving roads in South Lanarkshire submitted a local MSP, a number of members of the public from Lanarkshire also wrote in support of additional road spending. Some 31 people, predominantly farmers and cattle societies, wrote in support of additional expenditure for biological and agricultural research in Scotland and predominantly for the Moredun Research Institute. Finally, we received a number of e-mails from university students in favour of better student support. In total, around 122 of the letters or communications were specific about areas that required additional spending.

  The 10 most popular groups (including apparent campaigns mentioned above) that received support for additional public spending were:

  


Housing or homelessness (including 
Shelter postcards)


31% (37 responses)




The Scottish Agricultural and Biological 
Research Institutes


25% (31 responses)




Improving roads and reducing fuel 
tax


13% (16 responses 
including 1 petition)




Education (including sports education 
and school transport)


8% (10 responses)




Healthcare and additional treatments


7% (8 responses)




Improved rail transport and sustainable 
transport


7% (8 responses)




Improved student support and higher 
education


5% (6 responses)




Better provision for elderly care 
and for pensioners


4% (5 responses)




Improving rural affairs, forestry 
and sustainable environment


4% (5 responses)




Heritage (from built heritage through 
to musical heritage)


3% (4 responses)




  The remaining responses included support for law and order, local government services, nursery nurses and parental care, victim support, the voluntary sector, small businesses, reduced water charges, reduced council tax, improving civic participation and assistance for Belarussian children.

  The summary attempts to encapsulate the main responses that were contained in the correspondence. Many people, in addition to their particular point expressed a continuing support for investment in health and education.

  Feedback from awaydays

  The audiences for the awaydays were an invited group of local representatives including Councillors, and council officials, those from the communities, voluntary sector activists, the farming and fishing industries, enterprise and business, education, trades unions, the health services and social work.

  The following issues were raised consistently by a number of questioners across all four venues.

  Issues raised at awaydays

  Local government funding - difficulties for rural areas in general and for services such as fire in particular.

  Older people - importance of social work and properly funding care in the community.

  Voluntary sector - must ensure it is properly supported because of value added to public services.

  Transport - critical to economy, so must give more priority to roads and public transport.

  Drugs - much increase profile of drugs problems, also fund rehabilitation, increased policing essential.

  Health - NHS funding should be increased to improve services.

  Education - support frontline services, reduce ring fencing, when responding to McCrone.

  Rural affairs - ensure modulation doesn’t cut farm incomes, representations for farmers on National Park Boards, new fishing vessels.

Genetically Modified Crops

Rhoda Grant (Highlands and Islands) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what the implications are of siting a trial of genetically modified oilseed rape at Rosskill, with particular reference to the location of an organic farm nearby.

Ross Finnie: The purpose of the farm-scale evaluation programme is precisely to determine the environmental implications of growing GM crops under tightly controlled and closely monitored conditions. Consent was granted for this site to participate in the trial programme following safety assurances from the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (ACRE) that the crop does not pose a threat to public health or environmental safety.

  Separation distances have been put in place around the trial crop to minimise the possibility of cross-pollination with other related species. These distances are increased between the respective GM crop and a certified organic crop of oilseed rape. There is no safety or scientific justification for an organic farmer losing his organic status as a result of a farm-scale trial in the vicinity.

Genetically Modified Crops

Rhoda Grant (Highlands and Islands) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what positive outcomes will result from siting a trial of genetically modified oilseed rape at Rosskill by Munlochy.

Ross Finnie: The programme of farm-scale evaluations, including the site at Munlochy, is important and scientifically rigorous research that will provide information to evaluate any long-term effects of growing GM crops under normal agricultural conditions.

  To ensure that the data collected through these evaluations is representative of UK agricultural conditions an independent Scientific Steering Committee selected sites with a wide range of geographical, ecological and agricultural conditions. By selecting the Munlochy site, the committee (which includes members from the RSPB and the natural heritage agencies) has ensured that the distinctive ecology of the area is included within the research programme. As winter oilseed rape is widely grown in the north of Scotland, the site will provide valuable data on the possible impact on biodiversity, whether positive or negative, of growing a GM variety on a commercial scale in this region.

  The scientific information obtained from the Munlochy trial, together with data from the UK evaluation programme, will enable informed views to be reached before decisions are taken on possible wider commercial use.

Genetically Modified Crops

Maureen Macmillan (Highlands and Islands) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive what groups and organisations were consulted over the decision to site a trial of genetically modified oilseed rape at Rosskill by Munlochy.

Maureen Macmillan (Highlands and Islands) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will outline the consultation process which took place between its Rural Affairs Department and groups and organisations affected by the decision to site a trial of genetically modified oilseed rape at Rosskill by Munlochy.

Ross Finnie: SCIMAC (the Supply Chain Initiative on Modified Agricultural Crops) took responsibility for liaising with farmers to locate potential sites. The independent Scientific Steering Committee, which oversees the programme of farm-scale evaluations, then selected, from those put forward by SCIMAC, farms to be included the UK winter programme. Their selection included the farm near Munlochy.

  Following that initial selection, the decision, by the Scottish Executive, to grant consent for the Munlochy site was taken after consultation with the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (ACRE), the Food Standards Agency, the Health and Safety Executive, the natural heritage agencies including Scottish Natural Heritage, and the Scottish Agricultural Science Agency (SASA).

  Although the legislation under which this application was submitted does not require a formal public consultation process the public was notified of the proposed site by a Scottish Executive press announcement on 3 August and a statutory notice placed in the local press on 7 August.

Health

Mr Kenneth Gibson (Glasgow) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made by the Scottish National Blood Transfusion Service’s Effective Use of Blood Group in assessing the large variation in blood usage by clinicians with similar specialities treating similar cases, in some cases in the same institutions, as outlined in 1999 Health in Scotland.

Susan Deacon: Initial data presented by the group, which concentrated on one specialty, has resulted in changes in transfusion policy and ordering practices. This has led to a reduction in the number of units of blood used. The programme is now being extended to other specialties and work is in hand to improve the quality of data collected with a view to providing routine clinical information on transfusion practices.

  The Scottish National Blood Transfusion Service and the Clinical Audit and Resource Group are also jointly funding a three-year study to evaluate the role of the clinical nurse specialist in developing and implementing transfusion protocols and guidelines.

Health Technology Board for Scotland

Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive what staff have so far been appointed to the Health Technology Board for Scotland.

Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive what staff have yet to be appointed to the Health Technology Board for Scotland.

Susan Deacon: When fully functional, the Health Technology Board for Scotland will employ approximately 12 full-time staff.

  The Director, Dr Karen Facey, took up post on 3 July. She is assisted by two administrative staff. The recruitment process for other senior posts is proceeding.

Health Technology Board for Scotland

Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive how much the budget of the Health Technology Board for Scotland is.

Susan Deacon: In its start-up year for 2000-01, the Health Technology Board for Scotland has a budget of £1 million which will be spent on establishment costs in the main. This will rise to £2 million as the board becomes fully functional.

Heritage

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how often Ministers have met representatives of Historic Scotland since 1 June 1999, on what dates these meetings took place and what issues were discussed.

Rhona Brankin: Historic Scotland is an executive agency of the Scottish Executive and Ministers meet with officials of Historic Scotland frequently to discuss matters relating to Scotland’s built heritage.

Heritage

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how often Ministers have met representatives of the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland since 1 June 1999, on what dates these meetings took place and what issues were discussed.

Rhona Brankin: Scottish Ministers have met representatives of the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland once since 1 June 1999. I met the Chairman and the Secretary of the Royal Commission during a visit I made to the Commission’s offices in Edinburgh on 26 June 2000 to view the wide range of work which the Commission undertakes.

Heritage

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how often Ministers have met representatives of the Ancient Monuments Board for Scotland since 1 June 1999, on what dates these meetings took place and what issues were discussed.

Rhona Brankin: Scottish Ministers have met representatives of the Ancient Monuments Board for Scotland once since 1 June 1999. I met the board on 22 November 1999 when the following issues were discussed:

  the importance of the built heritage in educational services;

  the contribution of the built heritage to regeneration, particularly of rural areas;

  the long-term future of the local authority archaeology service in Scotland;

  resources available to support the built heritage, and

  the National Cultural Strategy.

  That meeting was mentioned in paragraph 2 of the board’s annual report for 1999 which was laid before the Scottish Parliament by the Scottish Ministers in May 2000. I have arranged to meet representatives of the board again on 4 October 2000 to discuss their annual report for 1999.

NHS Trusts

Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive from what date the payment of salary to the present Chairman of Forth Valley Primary Health Care NHS Trust commenced.

Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what time commitment was expected of the present Chairman of Forth Valley Primary Health Care NHS Trust from the date upon which payment of her salary commenced and what accommodation was reached with the Lord President and the Employment Tribunals service with regard to the time commitment required of the new Chairman in her role, at that time, as President of Employment Tribunals (Scotland).

Susan Deacon: Payment of remuneration to the Chair of Forth Valley Primary Care NHS Trust commenced on 1 February 2000 when she was no longer President of Employment Tribunals (Scotland).

  The time commitment on board business expected of Chairs of Health Boards and NHS Trusts is on average, around three days per week, some of which may be in the evenings or at weekends. This applied to the Chair of Forth Valley Primary Care NHS Trust from 1 February 2000.

National Parks

Dr Sylvia Jackson (Stirling) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive how the establishment of the first National Parks in Scotland will be taken forward following the passage of the National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000 through the Scottish Parliament.

Sarah Boyack: The enabling legislation received Royal Assent on 9 August. The next steps in setting up our first Scottish National Parks are those set out in sections 1-3 of the Act. I am pleased to announce that today I am setting that process in motion by publishing National Park proposals, under section 2(1) of the Act, for National Parks in Loch Lomond and the Trossachs and in the Cairngorms, and asking for a public consultation on these proposals.

  I have decided to ask Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) to act as a reporter, under the terms of section 3 of the Act, and to carry out consultations on both proposals. They have previous experience of consultative work on National Parks, leading to their advice to Government in 1999. This required extensive consultation with a wide range of organisations and individuals, and using a range of mechanisms involving both written documents and public meetings. The Requirements I am today issuing, directing them to undertake this work, set out clearly the particular requirements that a number of MSPs raised during the passage of the Bill, including that statutory consultees must receive copies of the consultation documents, that the consultation should be conducted in a participatory way, and that SNH must develop and report on the basis of objective criteria and methodology. Further details are given in the Requirement documents themselves. I am placing copies of these and the proposals in the Parliament’s Information Centre.

  Consultees can expect to hear from SNH shortly as they take forward the consultation.

  I have asked SNH to provide written reports to me, on the Loch Lomond and the Trossachs proposal by 15 March 2001, and on the Cairngorms proposal by 9 July 2001. Both reports will be published, and laid before the Scottish Parliament. After that, I will consider the case for bringing forward a consultation draft of a designation order in each case.

  Depending on the outcome of these consultations, I would hope that the first National Park in Loch Lomond and the Trossachs could be established on 1 April 2002, and the second in the Cairngorms by 1 January 2003.

Rail Network

Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive why Edinburgh Park railway station remains the responsibility of City of Edinburgh Rapid Transit and is not an integral part of the City of Edinburgh Crossrail scheme.

Sarah Boyack: Both developments are local transport projects and as such are the responsibility of the City of Edinburgh Council.

Textile Industry

Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what positive results there have been as a consequence of the activities of the Scottish Textile Forum.

Henry McLeish: The establishment of the Scottish Textile Forum on 12 June 2000 was welcomed by the textile industry, textile unions and public sector partners involved with the textile industry as a means of discussing priorities for public sector support of the industry. Scottish Executive press release 1687/2000 outlined 10 areas of support which the forum has been considering and I refer to my answer to S1W-9643 regarding progress.

Textile Industry

Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how many textile companies have closed down or gone into liquidation since the Scottish Textile Forum was established.

Henry McLeish: The Scottish Executive does not maintain comprehensive records on company closures. However, the Executive is aware of two textile companies that have closed since the establishment of the forum on 12 June 2000. Two other companies have closed down one of their sites.

Textile Industry

Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how much new money has been made available to the clothing and textile industry since the Scottish Textile Forum was established.

Henry McLeish: The extent of new financial support for the textile industry since the Scottish Textile Forum was established on 12 June 2000 depends on the demand from industry to initiate new projects eligible for support, rather than the availability of funds. A variety of projects, including those to support exports, training, marketing, innovation and e-commerce are currently being developed by the Enterprise Network and the textile industry, but it is too early to report on how many of these will proceed and how much public support they will attract.

Textile Industry

Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive what textile companies in the Borders have received Regional Selective Assistance in the last two years and what projects and outcomes have resulted from any such assistance.

Henry McLeish: None, Regional Selective Assistance (RSA) has only been available to companies in the Scottish Borders since July this year, when the new Assisted Areas map was announced. The new map covers much of Hawick, Galashiels and Kelso, where a number of textiles companies are located. Under the RSA scheme, grants are typically paid in instalments linked to implementation of projects across a number of years. Accordingly, while discussions about RSA have recently taken place with several such firms, no grant has yet been paid out.

Water Charges

Tavish Scott (Shetland) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive what progress it is making in putting in place a scheme to reduce the burden of water and drainage charges on low income households before the start of the 2001-02 financial year.

Sarah Boyack: The Executive is currently considering whether it can improve on the assistance provided to many low income households through the link between water and sewerage charges and council tax bands. I expect to publish a consultation paper on this shortly.

Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body

Holyrood Project

Mr Murray Tosh (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Presiding Officer whether information on cost estimates, the value of let contracts and risk assessment and value management exercises in respect of the Holyrood Project is routinely provided to the MSPs on the Holyrood Progress Group.

Sir David Steel: I understand from the Convener that all members of the Holyrood Progress Group are updated on this information on a fortnightly basis.

Holyrood Project

Mr Murray Tosh (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Presiding Officer what guidance has been given to the MSPs on the Holyrood Progress Group about the degree of detail on estimates and costs in respect of the Holyrood Project which they can divulge to colleagues, including in discussions at party group meetings.

Sir David Steel: The Convener of the Holyrood Progress Group has informed me that the group has established internal working practices, which include operating on a collective basis. Under these arrangements, no detailed information on costs will be divulged unilaterally by any member of the HPG to individual party members nor to party groups. The HPG and the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body will report on progress and expenditure to all MSPs no less than quarterly, in accordance both with the "Memorandum of Understanding" agreed by the two bodies, and the terms of the resolution passed by Parliament on 5 April 2000.

Holyrood Project

Mr Murray Tosh (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Presiding Officer what guidance has been given to the MSPs on the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body about the degree of detail on estimates and costs in respect of the Holyrood Project which they can divulge to colleagues, including in discussions at party group meetings.

Sir David Steel: The Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body has established internal working practices which include operating on a collective basis. Under these arrangements, no detailed information on costs will be divulged unilaterally by any member of the SPCB to individual party Members or to party groups. The Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body and the Holyrood Progress Group will report on progress and expenditure to all MSPs no less than quarterly, in accordance both with the "Memorandum of Understanding" agreed by the two bodies, and the terms of the resolution passed by Parliament on 5 April 2000.

Holyrood Project

Mr Murray Tosh (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Presiding Officer, further to his statement in his answer to question S1W-233 on 8 July 1999 that "a figure for contingency… is commercially confidential", why the Spencely Report was able to reveal the estimated value of contingency costs for the Holyrood Project.

Sir David Steel: Under normal circumstances, a public body would not publicise the sum of money set aside for contingency before or during a major capital project in order to protect its negotiating position. This is in line with standard public procurement guidance and my answer to question S1W-233 is consistent with that position. However, in the context of the debate surrounding the project in March this year the SPCB took the view that it was of paramount importance to publish the Spencely report in full and thereby put all available financial information before Parliament at a time when the future of the Holyrood Project was being considered.

Holyrood Project

Mr Murray Tosh (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Presiding Officer, further to his answer to question S1W-8961 on 21 August 2000, whether the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body will provide a full explanation of why it is felt appropriate to regard as commercially confidential the value of contracts awarded by it.

Sir David Steel: The Scottish Parliament’s Procurement Manual states that " openness and accessibility must be promoted except where the disclosure of commercially sensitive information would be likely to cause significant damage to the legitimate commercial interests of a supplier or tenderer or of the Scottish Parliament."   and at paragraph 2.30 that "the   protection of private and sensitive third party information will be strictly observed." .  The Procurement Manual is based on guidance from EC Procurement Directives which advise that, "certain information on (a) contract may, in certain cases, not be published where release of such information would impede law enforcement or otherwise be contrary to the public interest, would prejudice the legitimate commercial interests of particular enterprises, public or private, or might prejudice fair competition between contractors." HM Treasury Procurement Guidance states that "information provided by tenderers should be regarded and treated as confidential" and that " price and other details must not be revealed in a way that enables the information to be seen as applying to an offer from a particular firm".   All Parliament tenders are issued and submitted on a commercially confidential basis, and disclosure would also therefore be in breach of the individual tender agreements.

  The SPCB and the HPG recognise that there is a balance to be struck between the principles of openness and accountability and the need to safeguard against prejudicing the commercial interests of both client and contractor. Having considered this matter carefully, we remain of the view that the value of individual contracts relating to the Holyrood project should not be made publicly available while the possibility remains of similar packages being tendered. In due course, and with the consent of the relevant contractors, it may become appropriate to release information of this nature.

Holyrood Project

Mr Murray Tosh (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Presiding Officer,  further to the answer to question S1W-579 by the Presiding Officer on 3 August 1999, whether that answer was based on advice from the Holyrood project team; whether the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body (SPCB) now accepts, following the Spencely Report’s use of benchmarking, that it is a recognised technique for achieving best value in construction procurement to produce comparable construction costs; whether the SPCB now has access to the information requested in question S1W-579 and what use it expects to make of bench-marking during the remainder of the implementation period for the Holyrood project.

Sir David Steel: The Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body remains of the opinion that to compare the construction costs of recent major public works projects in Scotland such as schools, museums, hospitals, courts, offices etc with a Parliament building would be inadvisable. Spencely’s "rough and ready" comparisons of "fit out" and different building usage areas were indicative and fit for the purpose of his report. Indeed, he makes it clear that he had difficulty finding "comparable equivalents" for two of the three examples used. The SPCB and the Holyrood Progress Group are of the view that to commission a full exercise to obtain and collate such information - which is not readily available - would be time consuming, expensive and unlikely to lead to any meaningful conclusions. My answer to question S1W-579 on 3 August 1999 took full account of advice from Scottish Parliament officials including the Holyrood Project Team.